Eric
Good news about the move to PR, and many thanks for making those changes.
I approve.
Regards
Mark
From: Eric Johnson <eric@tibco.com>
To: SOAP-JMS <public-soap-jms@w3.org>
Date: 02/12/2011 10:47
Subject: Move to PR, with one caveat, PLEASE REVIEW
We finally had a call yesterday with the appropriate parties, and we did
get approval to proceed to PR, with one caveat.
During the review it was pointed out to me that we did not flag the
following as an assertion:
"If the message is formatted as a JMS BytesMessage, then the sender and
receiver MUST use the writeBytes() and readBytes() methods, respectively."
I wrapped this in the appropriate "assert" XML, and tagged it
Protocol-2073.
The second concern is that this isn't tested by our test suite, nor is
it marked as "untestable."
I specifically touched these files:
soapjms/soapjms-2011-PR.xml
soapjms/soapjms.xml
testcases/assertions/assertions.xsl
soapjms/testcases/testcases/testcases.xml
(The first two of the above to add the actual "assert" XML wrapper
around the text that raised the issue.
The XSL file I changed to output "untestable by test cases" when the
test cases cannot test something.
Finally, testcases.xml I updated to mark Protocol-2072 tested by three
tests that are currently marked as using TextMessage.)
I regenerated test assertions and the spec files, and I ended up
touching the following as well:
soapjms/ackcurrent.xml
soapjms/ackold.xml
soapjms/document-assertion-table.xml
soapjms/soapjms-2010-10-CR.html
soapjms/soapjms-2011-PR.html
soapjms/soapjms-2011-PR.xml
soapjms/soapjms.html
soapjms/testcases/assertions/assertions.html
soapjms/testcases/testcases/testcases.html
You can inspect updated files via URL, for example:
http://dev.w3.org/2008/ws/soapjms/soapjms-2011-PR.htmlhttp://dev.w3.org/2008/ws/soapjms/testcases/assertions/assertions.htmlhttp://dev.w3.org/2008/ws/soapjms/testcases/testcases/testcases.html
Please let me know if you approve or disapprove of the changes.
-Eric.